This paper reviews the evidence linking different types of livestock production systems to the emergence of new infectious diseases. It concludes that there is not currently enough evidence to show whether extensive or intensive systems would better protect against future pandemics. Both systems present different types of risk: low-yield farms generally have a higher risk of interspecies contact, but tend to keep more diverse livestock at lower stocking densities; while high-yield farms have a lower risk of livestock picking up a disease in the first place as the animals are often kept indoors, but the risk of any disease being spread is higher because of greater stocking densities, lower livestock diversity and sometimes poorer health and welfare.

This paper by researchers at Oxford’s Livestock, Environment and People (LEAP) programme studies how meat and health are represented in eight UK news websites. It finds a variety of both pro- and anti-meat narratives, with 50.8% of articles assessed having a neutral stance towards meat, 29.7% being anti-meat and 19.5% being pro-meat.

The concept of “less but better” meat (sometimes preferentially called less and better) has become influential in discussions about health, sustainable diets, particularly in higher-income countries. Definitions of both “less” and “better”, however, are still diverse. This paper reviews the definitions and interpretations of “less but better” meat used in 35 peer-reviewed journal articles.

A group of 33 institutional investors, holding over US$14 trillion assets, have written to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations to ask for a clear global roadmap for the transition to a sustainable food system by 2050. They raise concern about the financial risks to which the food system is exposed as a result of environmental damage, and ask for clear targets on emissions reduction (including methane) within each food subsector. The letter is coordinated by the FAIRR Initiative.

The UK government has published its food strategy for England (note that other regions of the UK are not within the scope, since food policy is devolved). Reactions have generally been critical, with many noting that many of the recommendations in the National Food Strategy review led by Henry Dimbleby have not been included. We have rounded up some relevant reactions and resources.

This book makes the case against “speciesism” - i.e. discrimination against nonhuman animals. It considers both wild and domesticated animals, and discusses how we can live without exploiting animals.

This book examines the concept of the Anthropocene by discussing food production, culinary practices and representation of food in film, literature and other media. It focuses on the Indian geographical and cultural context, seeking to correct the absence of analyses of “Anthropocene ecologies of food” focused on the Global South.

This report from UK Research and Innovation discusses the future of the alternative protein sector in the UK, drawing on a workshop held with representatives of industry, research and policymaking. It discusses plant proteins (e.g. pulses, lupins), fermentation processes (algae, bacteria, fungi, mammalian cells) and novel systems such as insect proteins and new types of aquaculture.

This report, produced jointly by the Good Food Institute and the Breakthrough Institute, argues that the United States should attempt to take the lead in the rapidly developing alternative proteins sector, including cellular agriculture. It frames the move towards alternative proteins as being driven not just by technological developments and investment, but also by increased consumer demand for protein coupled with public concerns about health and sustainability. As we note in the TABLE explainer What is ecomodernism?, the ecomodernism movement (of which the Breakthrough Institute is part) tends not to seek to actively influence consumption patterns but rather seeks to meet demand sustainably.